bring back HEROs to pvp

There are 2 possible options:

A) He meant to dshot another skill, but since people spam, it interrupted a 1/4

B) He random rupted

Just because it is possible for me to d-shot a 1/4 skill, doesn't mean I reflexed it.

what you just said has absolutely nothing to do with this thread.

In just about any game, PvP dies first (unless the PvP is really, really good and far better than the PvE side of it - which I'd say is not the case for GW). I am honestly doubtful *anything* can bring back PvP... except maybe casual PvP.

Well just to give a little more info regarding how I played HA when I used to PVP:

1) I hard core grinded ranks 1-4 purely by monking.

2) I went from rank 4-6 in one single double fame weekend by abusing pre nerf vimway

3) When nightfall came out, I looked through all the new skills, saw Searing Flames and simply couldn't believe it. I paid for the skill unlock pack on day one, put together 3x SF ellys (me and 2 heroes), ToF + Angelic Bond paragon, a second human player as a monk, and a tease / cof mesmer hero.

I easily beat just about every top 100 guild I faced for the first week or two who were still using obsolete meta builds from factions, and got up to rank 7, then heroes got removed from HA and I quit.

People complaining about heroes being op in HA only complained because they were completely incapable of countering the initial NF metas. It had nothing to do with the AI being too powerful, it was purely because even the top PVP guilds in the game were too slow to counter a zero day skill pack purchase and the originally OP NF skills being put onto 2 human / 4 hero teams so quickly.

----------

I would have never stopped doing HA if I still had access to full hero teams. Even if my only opponents were Daesu and Jeydra and I kept on losing to them, I still wouldn't stop playing and trying to win because I simply enjoyed HA and full hero teams far too much. Hero battles never compared to HA. They were boring, rubbish maps with far too muc capture the flag crap.

glad to know you can play a mindless button mashing build and fyi rank7 is a pitiful achievement considering you got it before heroes were removed.

and no one is complaining about some shitty sf hero build during 6v6, its actually about the tease mesmers mostly that made 8v8 battles a long grind.

So basically, you're complaining that Player vs Player was made too Player-oriented?

Many people believe that too, but that's probably because Player Vs Environment isn't really Player oriented.

Fact is that we aren't going anywhere since a few guys here are just trying to troll as nothing will be done anyway...
Obviously, we should really change the thread's title, as the point is to fix inactivity, so having 7 henchs and not 7 heroes would be sufficient and there wouldn't be any more posts about " waaa tease, waaa weapons " .

Like bhavv said, the average player today is someone that calls anything that beats him lame and overpowered.

I would be more impressed with his post if it wasn't oriented towards 2006 when HA was 6 players. Or if he hadn't complained about "too much capture the flag" as though HA isn't loaded with capture points/relic running/koth, ignoring that's not really "capture the flag" as he said.

Seriously, you're trying to revive Player vs Player in a 7 year old dead game that people have moved on from by bringing back things that made some people leave to start with. Can someone explain to me how throwing Gwen out to rupt 40/40'd 3/4s skills takes any skill at all? You mock people for "whining" about stuff being lame, ignoring that killing someone because a hero pdrained a fast-cast RC with absolutely no skill being involved might actually BE lame. This is like that one guy who tried to blame people for not being skilled enough when bots were pleaking their Patients.

The effort to revive it admirable, but dismissing people's actual concerns because you guys think you know better and act high and mighty about an irrelevant metagame is not going to get you taken seriously.

ask yourself, why do you still play the pvp aspect of this game? so you can play vsing other people with heroes? im pretty sure they never intended the game to be 1player+7heroes/hench vs 1player+7hero/hench.

or did you get stuck on your poor old kitty after 7 years into the game? and trying to still get that poor old birdy.

what is more funny is hb tards trying to voice an opinion on 8v8 formats with 0 credibility.

and arguing about a solution to the inactivity in a format that should require 8 real people by adding full hero/hench teams is probably the dumb-est idea i have ever heard.

Yet, the " hb tards" ( not referring to me only) probably do know more about heroes than a few guys Ha'ers. "Hb tards" are today winning mat's ( not referring to me), " hb tards" did manage to hold halls with unusual builds ( rspike heroway mainly)...

Dumb ideas, dumb xxx... Are you still playing the game or did you stop 3 years ago like i'm thinking ?

Personnaly, i'm not asking to have every single format to be played with 7 henchs, this would make no sense. What is needed is ONE FORMAT that can be played with heroes/henchs/zaishens(i do not mind), so there's at least something you can do on your own at any time...

Just because all the hero-obessed tards have done in this game was playing with ai and now unable to do so and still failing in 2k12 doesn't mean you know more about heroes then the normal pvper.

hb tards winning mats? EVERY pvper played hb, what type of idiotic statement is that?.

heroway never held halls(not sure if you even played during 2006-2008).

ive stopped tombsing at the end of 09 because it was/is completely dead during my timezone(gmt+10) + american buddies quitting. also heroes and henchman is not the solution.
good use of time, slugging it out with hero ai? lol its the sole reason hb was removed, because it was dead and all it did was encourage red resign to farm points/faction which only attracts pvers which in turn contributes more problems to the in-game economy and having absolutely nothing to do with pvp in the process.

Alright, but do you have a realistic solution to fix inactivity then ? If not, i think most players will still prefer being able to play the game than not ..

The "whole point" of PvP, for years, was to play cooperatively with your team against the enemy team, and beat them in a contest of skill. If your ranger was better than theirs, their casters got less spells off and their monk had to deal with more poison on everyone - a single player could do a lot to sway a match. But when heroes were rampant, that whole "skill" thing went out the window - Gwen with a tease/smite bar could keep entire midlines from casting *without any effort on the part of her team*. It literally completely undermined the entire point of PvP content. When you're no longer fighting players, what the hell is the point? PvE on a different map? :/

Bringing heroes back is a bad idea. The stale metas, the ridiculous gimmicks, the hero bars specifically built to exploit broken AI; it really was worse than not playing the game at all. For the good players like me, we could actually beat it with a team, so it was more annoying than anything (because we were interested in, y'know, PvP and not PvE), but against the scrubs or midrange players, it was brutal; the teams that couldn't beat heroes and were forced to bring heroes themselves. That pattern repeated itself until gimmicky hero bars were in basically every low-rated PvP match, and made it completely unplayable. It made PvP into PvE, except instead of playing against ANet's gimped ass earth ele monsters, you fight a team with player-picked skills designed to abuse the AI as much as possible.

And lastly, nothing is going to revive the PvP in a game that's been dead for 4 years. The problem with your change is that, in addition to not reviving it, you will destroy the quality of gameplay for anyone unfortunate enough to still be playing the game in 2012. For no gain. Is that your goal?

And how can you be so sure that it will be no gain??? I've been in every single outpost on diferent times today, and i didn't find any organized play anywhere.
B At didn't show up, there are about 20 guys sitting in id1 ha, one team getting no opponents in codex and AB is empty... That's pretty much what the game will be looking like when GW2 will be out...

Let's go ask all those players if they wouldn't like going in with henchs only to have quick matchs instead of standing for nothing ?? The point isn't having heroes exclusively, it's about being able to play, you don't seem to get it( probably because you didn't try to PvP recently, so you can't know how it is....)... I'm pretty sure people would be satisfied if it was zaishen henchmen..

And the quality of the gameplay is already ruined by bots/cheaters and syncers,except if you're playing 24/7 so this argument isn't valid..

the actual point is to let the game rot and die thats all.

We can bring up to 2 henchmen into PvP. How many people are really going to start playing if instead of 2 henchmen it is 2 heroes?

The only thing that can bring PvP back is a massive influx of players. No matter how you look at it, heroes are not going to do this.

No, but for the players already playing there are more options. I would feel more comfortable playing an AT with 6 people using heroes instead of henchmen, hoping that more people will log on after the first round.

The point is to be able to fill your team with henchs. Not only 2, but being able to take 3-7 ( depending on the format). Obviously, replacing 2 henchmen by 2 heroes won't do anything at all..

human intelligence versus artificial intelligence.

I think the work around is to say, each human team MUST contain 2-3 artificial intelligence to level the playing field, if there is really a need for them to cooperate to compete.

It is quite graspable as gw2 has already indicated 8 real players group is too much but is required for balancing in gw1, making all teams with 5 humans+3 heroes may be opened up to more players to enjoy gw1 pvp.

I have to agree with op. It was scary when i went to dragon arena, a special event, and the timer resets more than it does waiting for a gvg match. It has gotten to the point that if pvp is going to continue heros will have to be allowed in certain arenas and things will have to change. The alternative is nobody will gvg or ha. These arenas will seize up and die like an engine that ran out of motor oil.

You were getting timer resets in Dragon Arena because there's a limit on how many matches can happen at the same time, and because after all other players get in, if what's left is less than 12, there can't be another match until there's at least 12 players waiting in related outposts.

I don't know the exact number, but it's not unlimited.

Looks like no one can dispute this point.

And you pointed out why so many players ask to allow 3-7 hench parties to go in : because you need too many players to make a format active.

- Heroes Ascent : 18( 6+2 vs 6+2, and an other 6+2 for the uw match)
- Codex : 8 players
- GvG : theorically, you can have 2 humans + 4 henchs, but that's ridiculous and you still need many opponents because you can't directly face the same opponent
- Alliance Battles : 24 players ( !!)
- JQ/FA : both require 16 players

I pointed out the minimum number required, so if you count the average number of players in formats today, i let you imagine how it will be in a few months...

This is wrong for the right reasons. PvP needs more people or it will die (it is in the process of doing so). PvP needs a giant influx of players. The simple thought is that heroes take up player slots so it effectively increases the number of teams. That's good right?

No, no it isn't. It is an immediate, very small, short term gain. Over time heroes hurt the format more than they help, just read the thread. Even then the gain is so tiny compared to the number of people that PvP needs to bring in. If the current PvP population was multiplied by 8 that still would not be enough for a healthy PvP game.

No one has disputed it because, while true, it's also completely meaningless.

"It would give more options" is empty and doesn't explain WHY it would be a good option as opposed to any other way to "give more options". "I would feel more comfortable" is a statement of preference. I'd feel more comfortable with a lot of things but that doesn't do a damn thing to explain why I should be able to have them. At best all it does is point back to the actual argument.

I'm not really sure what I'm missing here...

It means where my guild might have played an AT, we now don't play. Activity, especially if people log on after the (probable) forfeit we get for first round.

The point he wanted to mean, i guess, is that it can hardly be worse with heroes than what the game is today. At least, it will create a semblance of activity, even if it's on short term..